![\"soeren](\"https:\/\/soerenkern.com\/web\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/10\/soeren-kern-obama-france.jpg\" "\\"soeren")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
European newspapers have reacted to Barack Obama\u2019s Nobel Peace Prize with a mixture of incredulity and scepticism. Almost without exception, newspapers across the continent (and political spectrum) are saying the award to Obama is premature and undeserved.<\/em><\/p>\n Soeren Kern | PJ Media | October 11, 2009<\/p>\n European newspapers have reacted to Barack Obama\u2019s Nobel Peace Prize<\/a> with a mixture of incredulity and scepticism. Almost without exception, newspapers across the continent (and political spectrum) are saying the award to Obama is premature and undeserved.<\/p>\n For many people, that conclusion seems perfectly reasonable. But coming from Europe\u2019s sycophantic media establishment, which has spent the last two years worshiping Obama as a messianic figure, such a reaction represents a sea change in sentiment toward Obama. Is Obama\u2019s European star finally falling to earth?<\/p>\n What follows is a brief review of what some of the major European newspapers are saying about Obama\u2019s Nobel.<\/p>\n In Britain, the London-based Economist<\/a> magazine, which endorsed Obama for president, writes: \u201cBut is the award premature? Although the prize may be given in the spirit of encouraging Mr Obama\u2019s government, it might have been better to wait for more solid achievements. With so many good intentions, and so many initiatives scattered around the world (and an immensely busy domestic agenda, including health-care reform and averting economic collapse), Mr Obama appears to be racing around trying everything without yet achieving much.\u201d<\/p>\n The leftwing Guardian, in an analysis titled \u201cBarack Obama\u2019s Nobel Prize: Why Now?<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cThe reality is that the prize appears to have been awarded to Barack Obama for what he is not. For not being George W Bush. Or rather being less like the last president. The question now is whether having being anointed perhaps too early by the committee, a Nobel prize earned so cheaply and at so little cost will help him in his efforts on the international stage or rather be an albatross around his neck. Something against which all his future efforts will be judged \u2013 and perhaps found wanting.\u201d<\/p>\n Elsewhere at the Guardian, an informal online opinion poll asks: \u201cDid President Obama deserve the 2009 Nobel peace prize?<\/a>\u201d More than 70 percent of respondents say \u201cno.\u201d<\/p>\n The leftwing Indpendent, in a commentary titled \u201cThis award is premature \u2013 and potentially very foolish<\/a>,\u201d writes that Obama \u201cshould have refused the award, politely saying that he was flattered and, while appreciating the motivation, was as yet unworthy of such distinction. Instead, he is once again lauded for his symbolism and potential rather than his actual deeds. One day, he might be a worthy winner. But not today.\u201d<\/p>\n Elsewhere, the Independent, in an article titled \u201cThe real world has little time for prizes<\/a>,\u201d writes \u201c\u201d Yes, he\u2019s made those fancy speeches \u2026 But, as they say in American politics, where\u2019s the beef? \u2026 Obama\u2019s prize is a final, gratuitous shot at George W Bush (remember him?).\u201d<\/p>\n The center-right Times of London, in an article titled \u201cPrize Fools<\/a>,\u201d writes that \u201cthe Norwegian Nobel Committee is in danger of putting the entire comedy industry out of business.\u201d Elsewhere, in a commentary titled \u201cPointless Nobel prize reveals how President Obama is lost in his own mystique<\/a>,\u201d the Times advises: \u201cScrap the Nobel Peace Prize. It\u2019s an embarrassment and even an impediment to peace.\u201d<\/p>\n The Financial Times, in an editorial titled \u201cUrgency of Now?<\/a>,\u201d argues that the Nobel committee is \u201ctrapped in an adolescent adulation of Mr Obama that, if once shared by many, most have put behind them. Its continuing desire to flatter a particular tendency in US politics \u2013 Al Gore and Jimmy Carter are recent laureates \u2013 risks painting it as an annex to the left wing of the US Democratic party.\u201d<\/p>\n In France, the center-right Le Figaro, in a commentary titled \u201cDisservice to Obama<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cShould we abolish the Nobel Peace Prize? We ask the question after Barack Obama was awarded the prize on Friday. This decision, which oozes political correctness, was a very bad idea.\u201d<\/p>\n The center-left Le Monde, in a commentary titled \u201cThe Meaning of the Nobel<\/a>,\u201d writes that the Nobel committee \u201cjustified their choice in language worthy of worst-UN diplomatic rhetoric.\u201d It argues that the prize should have gone to \u201cbrave Russians or Chinese who are fighting for liberty in their own countries.\u201d<\/p>\n The intellectual, left-leaning weekly magazine L\u2019Express, in an article titled \u201cObama, the Nobel of the Ridiculous<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cRepublican Ronald Reagan contributed to the liberation of Europe and the collapse of the \u2018evil empire\u2019 that was the Soviet totalitarianism. And Democrat Bill Clinton has worked hard to create the conditions for an honorable peace between Palestinians and Israelis. They are both more worthy recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize. It would be honourable for Barack Obama to refuse the prize. He might merit it someday. But not this year.\u201d<\/p>\n In Germany, the leftwing magazine Der Spiegel, in an article titled \u201cMore Burden than Honor<\/a>,\u201d writes that bestowing the Nobel Prize to Obama now is like \u201cawarding a medal to a marathon runner who has just completed the first mile. \u2026 Who has grabbed Obama\u2019s unclenched fist? Ahmadinejad? The Taliban? Kim Jong Il? Putin or Medvedev? Netanyahu or Abbas? No one. No success in sight, nowhere.\u201d<\/p>\n The D\u00fcsseldorf-based business newspaper Handesblatt says \u201cThe Nobel Prize for Obama is a Mistake<\/a>.\u201d The Financial Times Deutschland, in a commentary titled \u201cObama\u2019s You-Are-Not-George Bush-Prize<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cMany will regard the premature award as exaggerated Obama hype.\u201d<\/p>\n The center-left Frankfurter Rundschau, in an interview titled \u201cThe Obama Effect is Pure Religion<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cWorld public opinion has concentrated the age-old anti-Americanism in one person, George W. Bush \u2013 the ultimate evil. The perfect embodiment of evil of all time. Now we invoke the complementary figure: Obama, the saviour, the fighter against evil. These figures are now set directly against each other. They are ideal constructs, usually only seen in movies.\u201d<\/p>\n In Italy, the center-left Corriere della Sera, in a commentary titled \u201cA Prize Against (Bush)<\/a>,\u201d writes about the \u201cirresistible rush that seems to have gripped the jury of Oslo.\u201d It argues that \u201call [of Obama\u2019s] innovations are still in the launch pad\u201d and thus the prize is premature, \u201cunless the prize awarded to Obama is meant to be a Nobel against against George Bush.\u201d<\/p>\n The center-left La Repubblica<\/a> writes: \u201cThis award is simply a \u2018call to action.\u2019 In sporting parlance, Obama has made the goal and now he has to earn it.\u201d In an online poll, the center-left La Stampa asks: \u201cNobel Prize for Obama: Just or Hasty?<\/a>.\u201d About 55 percent of respondents say it was premature, 45 percent say it was just.\u201d<\/p>\n In Spain, the leftwing P\u00fablico<\/a>, which normally exhibits a sycophantic affection for Obama, believes he should share the Nobel Prize with George W Bush. The paper writes that without Bush, it would be \u201cimpossible to imagine that a new president could win the Nobel only for his speeches, his spirit and his smile, but without any tangible achievements to sell.\u201d<\/p>\n The center-right ABC<\/em>, in an editorial titled \u201cA Premature Nobel<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cNot so long ago the common view in the West was that our values were being threatened by a war that was declared upon us by terrorism \u2026 One wonders what the members of the prize committee understand by the word \u201cpeace.\u201d Are they thinking about a peace in which free societies can continue to be free? Or is their peace one of appeasement and making a pact with those who want to destroy the liberal democratic order?\u201d<\/p>\n In Switzerland, the Basler Zeitung, in an editorial titled \u201cNobel Prize: For What?<\/a>,\u201d writes: \u201cIt is quite bizarre. President Barack Obama has just won the Nobel Prize. It is not clear why. Because he has made peace, a kind of peace, with Hillary Clinton? \u2026 Strictly speaking, the whole thing is really postmodern: A person can now win the Nobel Peace Prize when he says he hopes for peace sometime in the future. But he is not obligated to do it. The intent is sufficient. Great.\u201d<\/p>\n Published by PJ Media<\/a> on October 11, 2009<\/p>\n Soeren Kern<\/a> is Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estrat\u00e9gicos \/ Strategic Studies Group<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" European newspapers have reacted to Barack Obama\u2019s Nobel Peace Prize with a mixture of incredulity and scepticism. Almost without exception, newspapers across the continent (and political spectrum) are saying the award to Obama is premature and undeserved.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[112,10],"tags":[20,9,41,173,175],"class_list":["post-560","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-anti-americanism-european-union","category-transatlantic-relations","tag-anti-americanism","tag-europe","tag-barack-obama","tag-transatlantic-relations","tag-united-states"],"yoast_head":"\nEnd of Obamamania? Europe’s Tepid Reaction to Obama’s Nobel<\/strong><\/h3>\n